A. The Defendant committed the instant crime with mental disability under the influence of alcohol.

B. The sentence imposed by the lower court (two years and six months of imprisonment) is too unreasonable.

C. It is unreasonable for the lower court to order the Defendant to disclose and notify the disclosure and notification.

2. Determination

A. According to the record, it is difficult to view that the defendant was in a state of lacking the ability to discern things or make decisions due to drinking, in light of the fact that the defendant is found to drink at the time of the crime of this case, but the defendant stated that he was in a level of usual drinking (Evidence No. 17-5 pages, Police Examination of the defendant's suspect against the defendant) and that the defendant's behavior described by the victim is difficult to view it as an act of a person with mental disability (Evidence No. 9-8 pages, Police Statement of the Victim, etc.).

Furthermore, even if the defendant was in a state of mental disorder due to drinking.

However, the crime of similar rape committed by the Defendant (Article 297-2 of the Criminal Act) is a sexual crime under Article 2 subparag. 3 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes, and Article 20 of the Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment, etc. of Sexual Crimes provides that “If a sexual crime (excluding a crime under Article 2 (1) 1) is committed in the state of mental disorder caused by drinking or drugs, Article 10(1) and (2) and Article 11 of the Criminal Act may not apply.” In light of the nature and nature of the crime in this case, it is reasonable that Article 10(2) and (1)

Therefore, this part of the defendant's assertion is rejected.

B. As to the assertion of unfair sentencing, ① the instant crime was placed on the floor by putting the victim’s head on the floor and placing the Defendant’s fingers, etc. on the victim’s resistance and the method thereof.